Portmarnock (R&B) v Dunluce Links at Portrush

[Matt_Ward]

In reviewing these courses I was struck by the utter differences between these two giant courses from the Emerald Isle.

The Dunluce Links possesses some of the most spectacular property one can imagine for a course but it also has become a bowling alley width layout with heavy, heavy penalities for even the slightest off-line drive.

However, you still have a stunning array of holes from the 4th, 5th, 13th, 14th and 15th, to name just a few.

Portmarnock's Red & Blue Nines are likely the fairest of all the top courses one encounters in the country. Everything is in full view and being situated on a peninsula clearly adds a role for Mother Nature.

The player must drive the ball well and I was amazed at how the routing of the two nines here takes you to all corners of the property. You also have some of the more unique green contours that can easily delfect your approaches to the far corners.

I wonder how people who have played both would stack them up against each other? In my mind, I see it as a flat draw of greatness between two heavyweights.

[Chris_Hunt]

Matt:

I guess I would favor Portrush for several reasons.  While the internal green contours of Portmarnock rival those of Portrush, I think the green complexes and their settings are more interesting and varied at the Dunluce (because Portrush has greater undualtion and elevation change, no doubt).  This theme carries over to the fairway contouring as well, and I prefer the rolly-polly nature and occasional lack of visibility at Portrush (despite the terror that the width instills in the golfer due to current club practices).  Portmarnock looked downright flat as I looked back at pictures...I wonder how much it was actually levelled off over the years.  Both courses could use a bunker refreshening aesthetically, with Portrush bunkers directing play more because of their fierceness in places (#1, #17 come to mind immediately).

And the clincher for me is the thought that if someone had the opportunity today to find the Portmarnock peninsula and lay out 18 holes instead of 27 that it could be the best course in Ireland.  You would be hardpressed to get many better permutations at Portrush than the current course, to my mind.  That feeling of an opportunity missed at Portmarnock, however slight, will always sour the course in my mind (but not enough to stay away )

An somewhat analytic review such as this makes this comparison much closer than the mental and gut instincts I remember from playing them, where Portrush was the easy favorite.

Chris

[Matt_Ward]

Chris:

I don't see Portrush as an "easy" favorite.

I hear what you're saying but for me the issue that really is a downer at Dunluce was the extreme narrowing of the fairways to an almost unfair capacity for anything resembling sound execution. I'm not suggesting Kansas-wide fairways but the ones I experienced were no wider than what competitors face in the US Open. Add in the odd bounce and the intensity of the wind and in many cases hitting fairways there is akin to winning the lottery in a few instances.

I don't think a course of the caliber of Dunluce needs to be doctored to distort what is clearly great to start with.

If the fairways were widened to be a bit more realistic then I can see the qualities of the Dunluce being beyond the Championship 18 at Portmarnock. I do concur that the green contours and dimensions favor Dunluce.

Let me also mention one thing in addition that's a plus for Portmarnock -- all the sight lines are right in front of you. Portmarnock doesn't have to rely upon the odd bounce or other such quirk to demonstrate its uniqueness and quality.

It's an interesting discussion on two courses that demand nothing less than your full attention.

[Andy Hughes]

Matt, against my better judgement (and despite your obvious inability to appreciate the subtleties of Glenbrook:)), I tend to trust your commentary on courses.  Here, you are praising courses that tend to be universally praised, and I have no reason to doubt it.
But can a course really be a great one if the fairways are 'silly-narrow', to the point where there is no strategy whasoever other than please-please-please let me end up in the fairway somewhere?  Is Portrush at this time a great course in your opinion?

[Matt_Ward]

Andy:

Fair question.

I relished the opportunity to finally play Portrush when I visited the Emerald Isle for the first time last September. In fact, Portrush was my first first stop.

Clearly, the dunes like land and the rolling terrain is awesome stuff and it will stir the blood long before you play the first tee shot.

Unfortunately, someone or somehow the notion that fairways have to be sooooooooooo narrow and then topped off with some of the most demanding rough I have played -- the stuff at Portrush makes what Bethpage Black has look like a toga party!

When golf becomes "either or" type stuff then it can't really offer the strategic elements to the max. The sad fact is that a layout like Dunluce doesn't need man's help to be as great as it is.

When you narrow fairways to that extreme the issue of skill becomes less and less of an issue. In my mind -- recovery cannot be reduced systematically to nothing more than a SW or PW hack out of the junk in most situations. To be clear -- I'm not advancing the lame idea that a player should have a clear go at the green / target with no punishment but proportionality was definitely lacking when I played Portrush.

Interestingly enough -- County Down was not that case and people of substance have declared County Down to be a great driving test and I concur. You do have a fair but not overly generous area at County Down -- the Dunluce Links doens't need to be deemed a contrivance because the sheer qualities the course has can more than hold their own.

P.S. Andy -- the stuff at Glenbrook is so subtle that no one --minus you perhaps   -- will notice what you claim to be there!

[Andy Hughes]

Matt
OK, so I may be a little slow, but is it your contention that at this time Portrush is or is not a great course?  Is it not at this time because the driving areas are just too narrow? Or is it a great course now in spite of the fairway widths? And if so, what does that mean in terms of great courses and their driving requirements?
Andy

P.S. Andy -- the stuff at Glenbrook is so subtle that no one --minus you perhaps   -- will notice what you claim to be there!

Careful, or I may have to start a new thread extolling the virutes of Glenbrook and force you to refute me hole-by-hole!  

[Matt_Ward]

Andy:

The best way for me to answer your question is to respond in the same manner a good college friend of mine did during the past US Open at Shinnecock Hills. He was simply amazed about just how great the course was -- until the USGA bastardized it.

In his mind -- Shinnecock is great irrespective of the Open. However, I can fully understand if someone not familiar with the course would argue otherwise. My friend had the wisdom to see what Shinnecock fundamentally is and not penalize it because of the way it was prepared.

It's the same I feel about Dunluce Links -- the greatness is there -- it's about time that those who think they must "help" the course back down and return to the way it was originally intended.

[Paul_Turner]

In agree with Chris, Portrush is clearly the better course, in every department.

Yes the fairways are a bit narrow now.  But the Dunluce must have kicked your arse Matt!

[Jack_Marr]

I think you have to play Portmarnock a good few times before you appreciate it properly. It's an absolute joy to play. There aren't many dunes, but I think there are some holes that play a little blind. Sometimes you cant'; see the farirways for the grass.

I'm not comparing the two courses because I don't know enough about Portrush.

[Matt_Ward]

Paul:

Dunluce did not -- as you so refreshingly say -- kick my arse! Paul -- I simply 1-ironed it to death!

The funny thing about it is that when classic courses like Shinnecock or other US Open courses are "morphed" into Open form by narrowing the fairways to absurd limits people will chime in and say what's happening here.

Why doesn't that apply to courses overseas -- especially the revered ones in the UK and Ireland?

I ama big fan of Dunluce -- but how about the folks there allow the course to be played as it was intended? I don't see the need for fairways to be choked to such a limit that in a manner of speaking you can walk single file down plenty of them!

You get plenty of people barking about the need for width and how it provides for the kind of playing angles that maximize the design, while at the same time minimizing the likelihood of looking for lost balls. I agree.

Frankly, Portrush should realize the qualities that Colt provided because the layout doesn't need some cheap gimmick like hay rough just off the fairway to bolster the reputation of the course. I don't consider SW and PW recoveries of 80 yards to be an appropriate defense mechanism and frankly few here on this site do either.

I rate both courses dead even, but I'll be the first to admit that widening Dunluce would likely change my mind because of the reasons already stated by others.

[Paul_Turner]

Matt

Looking at their website, the holes do look narrower:

http://www.royalportrush.com

Anyone agree with Ran that the 17th and 18th should perhaps be played as the 1st and 2nd?  This would give a great finishing stretch in the current 13th-16th holes.

The website reminded me how cool the greens are at Royal Portrush...see the 15th for example.

[TEPaul]

Matt Ward:

For God's sake, how on earth can you say you have to walk single file down fairways at Port Rush's Dunluce course? That is simply not the case and you know that and they definitely did not narrow the course for you probably the one time you played it!

There're a number of holes at Dunluce that simply play through some very topographical areas---eg sometimes massive parallel hills or rolls on one or sometimes both sides of fairways. That's just the way the land was before they routed some of their holes through it. I played a competition there two years ago and the fairways weren't any narrower than any other course over there except some of those holes that just happen to have topography along both sides of them. Nobody can or should cut fairway up on that stuff!

[Larry_Keltto]

I played Dunluce three times in mid October of 2003 and the fairways did not seem tight or narrow to me.

[Matt_Ward]

Paul:

You make a good point -- getting the 17th and 18th as the 1st and 2nd would make for a much better finish. I wonder why the club opted to go the direction they followed.

TEPaul:

I can only judge what I saw -- I played the course and facts are facts. The layout is overly narrow on a number of holes that are within the key dunesland area. I'm not talking about rough when you miss say 10 yards wide of the mark -- I'm speaking about CULTIVATED HAY ... the kind where balls are simply swallowed up in the same manner as Jaws did to humans in the movie. Like I said the stuff at Bethpage Black is a fine cut compared to the wild and wooly grass you see at Dunluce.

That situation is not needed for such a superb layout. How does widening the holes a slight bit -- and more importantly allowing some sort of recovery beyond the automatic pulling out of a SW or PW -- diminish the nature of what Colt provided?

Gents:

What's really laughable is how people wax on and on and on here on GCA about the value of fairway width (greater playing angles, the freedom to avoid the agonizing looking for lostballs, etc, etc) and then when it hits home with a layout in the UK / Ireland -- no doubt one of the finest in the
world  -- everything is thrown out the window. Nothing like consistency -- right?

Might it just be possible that the daily preparation of the course has gone overly so in the penal direction?

[TEPaul]

I don't recall a fairway LZ at Dunluce that was less than 35 yards wide (and that would be in those topographically narrow holes and some wider than that. I don't call that kind of width narrow and certainly not single file. Something around 35 yards can seem narrow or narrower on some of those holes in those kinds of natural parallel ridge lines and such because some of the fairways are a bit off-angle to the tee or apparent line of play (#2,3,5,7,8,9) but they're still at least 35 yards wide which really isn't narrow.

[Matt_Ward]

TEPaul:

You artfully tap-danced around my main point. The issue goes beyond simply the width of the fairways. The issue of "either or" type golf is quite disturbing for me.

If any course -- not just Dunluce -- simply offers a fairway option and then an uncultivated HAY option where the use of a SW or PW is the only way to escape oblivion then something is wrong IMHO.

Recovery is part and parcel of the game. When courses overdose with rough to the point where lost balls can become a dominant ingredient then the quality of the design is being turned on its head.

Widening the fairways in only part of the solution -- declawing the density and depth of the rough and pushing it back a few more yards on each side would still maintain the integrity of the hole / course while still providing a mechanism for recovery when situations warrant. The course I played didn't permit the recovery option -- it simply hastened another search for those in my group. The greatness of Dunluce doesn't need the extra help from man's hand to make it more demanding -- the original architectural elements Colt provided are more than capable in doing that IMHO.

[Tommy Williamsen]

It is true that the Dunluce course has narrower fairways than most links courses.  It requires a certain kind of finesse and the ability to work the ball off the tee.  The greens complexes are fair and up and down is generally possible if you have a modicum of feel and ingenuity.  I like the width of the faairways the way they are.  Not every course has to allow the player to determine the best angle to the green.  Hving to hit a one iron isn't all bad, if you can't hit the driver in the fairway.  That is your choice.  It just means that you have a decision to make on the tee.  Portmarnock is grand but it doesn't grab you like courses with large dunes.  It is more subtle and takes a few times to appreciate its intricacies.
Any way that is my two cents worth.  

[TEPaul]

Matt:

I'm not 'tap dancing' around a damn thing when it comes to Dunluce. However, I understand what you're saying. If you hit it wild in a place like that a W or SW might be your best play to recover somewhere back into play---big deal---that's links golf. The thing I really like about Dunluce is it's fairway widths are not standardized. I think far more golf course should be like that. It'd obviously serve to make golfers think more or deal with the consequences.

If you want hamburger, then stick to hamburger---courses like Dunluce obviously aren't for you. That's fine! Golf and architecture is a "Big World".

[Matt_Ward]

TEPaul:

You missed my point.

I am a big fan of what Dunluce provides from the architectural side of the equation. The issue is the desire of the host club to INSERT something MORE from what Colt likely envisioned. Why beef up the penal aspects when the natural ground conditions are clearly first rate stuff? What's wrong in having recovery be a part of the equation? This is no different than American courses that erroneously believe that narrowing fairways with high rough on the sides is the way to go to strengthen their club's reputation.

There's no need to make the fairways and the surrounding grounds some sort of "either or" type golf. You don't see that sort of thing at TOC -- even County Down provides a better day-to-day prep regarding fairways and the HAY like conditions that exist there.

Tom, I agree with you Dunluce doesn't have "standard" width fairways. That's good. But, having fairways that could offer just a bit more width -- I'm not suggesting Kansas wide fairways -- along with some common sense on the close proximity to the HAY off the fairways would only serve to ENHANCE FURTHER the considerable reputation of such a superb course. Nothing more -- nothing less.

P.S. The best job in town may be the folks who swing through Dunluce looking for lost balls -- one guy I spoke to told me he routinely finds no less than 250 balls in a 4-5 period -- nearly 75% of them Pro V's or PVx. Not a bad catch!

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul:
You missed my point.
I am a big fan of what Dunluce provides from the architectural side of the equation. The issue is the desire of the host club to INSERT something MORE from what Colt likely envisioned."

Matt:

Maybe I did miss your point if that's it. Obviously, then, the best way to look at the issue is to find out what Colt did design on this golf course regarding fairway widths.

When I stood on some of the high points at Dunluce and looked across it and into the Valley course as well what I saw was a series of basically natural parallel ridges through which a number of the holes of those courses were routed (it even occured to me that perhaps Rees Jones saw this natural land of Dunluce and Valley and decided to use that style by actually making his own parallel mounds and ridges to mimic it).

I just don't remember fairways that were all that narrow even in those ridge corridors that a number of holes were routed through. I certainly don't remember fairways that were anything like you described as single-file. If some of those fairways are less than 35 yards wide maybe you have a point. After-all 35 yards in width is pretty much the standard American width---not something considered particularly narrow today. Also, on a lot of European links style or heathland style courses if you miss fairway you can be in a lot of hurt with the rugged vegetation over there. You mention TOC. I'm sure you're aware that although TOC is considered by some to be the prototype of all golf architecture the supreme irony of it is that many of its unique features were never really done anywhere else.

Again, probably the best way to look at this issue is whether or not Dunluce has significantly narrowed down their fairways recently or even compared to what Harry Colt designed or had in mind.

I'm not sure you have any idea what that was though---and either do I.